Rank: Super forum user 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Apparently not Ken.
It was interesting to learn that yet again the focus was on behaviours and lagging indicators. Industry often measures what is easy to measure as opposed to what should be measured - Cox & Flynn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
“due to an inept engineer’s mistake and I was blamed for it”
“repaired 12 years later because manager had the same accident”
- “hourly workers are punished by loss of bonus money”
“I tried to lift too much. No, we are still working short handed”
All quotes from Telos report for BP 3 months before the 2005 TX City explosion
“special attention to safety incentive and discipline programs that have been shown to discourage workers from reporting injuries and illnesses”
Quote from OSHA presentation to National Petrochemical and Refiners Association, May 2010 - OSHA speaker rather scathing not only of BP but the US onshore oil sector in general.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
Does this not show potential flaws in monitoring the safety performance of an organisation. If you rely on the "reactive" data (i.e. incidents) then you could argue that this is a poor performer due to the fact that they are having incidents in the first place! It is difficult however, to get Directors and the like to look at other safety performance indicators (such as housekeeping inspection reports and actions identified) as this are more "difficult" from them to understand the level of performance being shown as no incidents have occurred.
We battle on!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Indeed Billibob, these same directors appear to have no difficulty in cutting health and safety budgets, introducing zero accidents policies and mandatory PPE!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Billibob wrote:Does this not show potential flaws in monitoring the safety performance of an organisation. If you rely on the "reactive" data (i.e. incidents) then you could argue that this is a poor performer due to the fact that they are having incidents in the first place! It is difficult however, to get Directors and the like to look at other safety performance indicators (such as housekeeping inspection reports and actions identified) as this are more "difficult" from them to understand the level of performance being shown as no incidents have occurred.
We battle on! Absolutely, and heavy reliance on lagging indicators can lead to a continually changing management focus, zipping between different topics as and when they come up. Not the most effective or productive manner in which to monitor and manage OHS. A good article on combining leading and lagging indicators in a way that aims to keep a steady management focus is the concept of a Health and Safety (or whatever topic) Index, I found this article interesting to read: http://www.shponline.co....ement-root-reinforcement
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Of course if you have a Zero accident philosophy, promote mandatory PPE and control the cost of your Health and Safety budget (Like you would any other element of your business) it is assumed that you don't have leading indicators.
Or you could actually be keeping your people and processes safe through a holistic approach to Health and Safety and these are just one element of that approach.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
John J wrote:Of course if you have a Zero accident philosophy, promote mandatory PPE and control the cost of your Health and Safety budget (Like you would any other element of your business) it is assumed that you don't have leading indicators.
Or you could actually be keeping your people and processes safe through a holistic approach to Health and Safety and these are just one element of that approach. My response was aimed at the comment on a reliance of using lagging indicators, not a general response to the linked article in the OP. I wasn't suggesting that BP et al. did not use leading indicators etc. I'm sure they do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Jake, my comments were not specifically aimed at you and thanks for the link. Really interesting article. I measure leading and lagging indicators but slightly differently. I like the +/- concept.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.